Simply FUD/ wrong info!
J&G are out in lala land if your post is true!

Saiga rifles and shotguns are for sale from FFL's localy!

Librarian

05-26-2011, 9:04 PM

California has done no such thing.

FUD.

762.DEFENSE

05-26-2011, 9:08 PM

Bud's told me that like a year ago, typical FUD.

NorCalAthlete

05-26-2011, 9:29 PM

Call em back and tell them they're flat out wrong and should give you a discount for proving it to them (have evidence ready, IE a CA dealership currently selling them. For example, Valkyrie Arms in Milpitas I believe stocks and sells them). Tell them they should knock off at least 10%-15% for the future business they'll be doing with CA customers now that they can be assured it's perfectly legal to sell to CA.

iskra31

05-26-2011, 9:40 PM

They did ban Saigas, but only the ones from Kalashnikov USA, not from Russian American Armory or any other company.

This entry can only ban one specific item anyway, due to Harrott-requiredspecificity and required lack of "series" status.
[Harrott generally prohibits "series" concept without formal detailed listing of individual series elements by make/model. Were that prohibited Saiga entity in the to refer to multiple different gun make/models, it would be a "series" - which can't happen. The only permitted 'series' are "AR15 series" and "AK47 series", and members of these series generally must be declared individually by make and model - those makes/models forming the Kasler list.]

DOJ Firearms also understands this in the same fashion as we do. In Dec 2005 - when they were thinking about 'listing' various 'off-list' guns - the DOJ created an internal memo (under auspices of "the Ferranto Commission") proposing various guns to be added to the Kasler list:
http://www.calgunlaws.com/Docs/ASSAULT%20WEAPONS/Articles/commision%20changes.pdf Among various other off-list guns, they proposed adding the "EAA Saiga" - clearly demonstrating DOJ understood that that particular Saiga variant was not 'listed' at the time.

Do note that this was a proposal and it did NOT go thru: the Kasler list remained unchanged since its inception in fall of 2000. Since the advent of summer 2006's AB2728 legislation (becoming active Jan 1, 2007), both "lists" (Roberti-Roos and Kasler) of banned-by-name AWs have been frozen and cannot be updated.

In 2006, an individual in San Jose underwent some drama with two RAAC Saigas, against the San Jose PD and Santa Clara County DA's office. The DA's office tried to muscle an AW conviction and suppress crime lab information, but that fell apart due to an attorney with fortitude. I had a minor role in helping her out clarifying details and Harrott matters, etc. with Don Kilmer coming in to help for the final sweep. The individual ended up with a short term prohibition just to get out of the situation and attend to larger family issues, and had to dispose of the guns [which moved from the police lockup to a local FFL]. Gene Hoffman and I bought them, with one going as a raffle prize at a NRA+CRPA miniconvention in 2008, and another one retained by me for future fundraising, etc. fun.

One DOJ inspector (not Iggy, not Dana...) did try to cause minor trouble in 2007 in a SoCal gunshop relating to an RAAC Saiga, but a proposed conference call between various pre-CGF "interested parties" and his DOJ management chain caused him to back off that stance.

Since then, there must have been thousands upon thousands of RAAC (Russian-American Arms Co.) Saigas sold within CA at gunshops and gunshows, all under CA DOJ inspection/audit. It would not surprise me if 50,000 of all RAAC Saiga caliber variants have been sold in CA since then.

straykiller

05-26-2011, 10:45 PM

So if this was true would I be a felon since I own one?

so would i

MrPlink

05-26-2011, 11:15 PM

JG has always been a buncha tools when it comes to this stuff

DanDaDude102

05-27-2011, 2:21 AM

They did ban Saigas, but only the ones from Kalashnikov USA, not from Russian American Armory or any other company.

This is correct and the reason for the fud confusion

Ryan in SD

05-27-2011, 4:02 AM

What idiots. I think tomorrow Im going to write a kind letter.

robcoe

05-27-2011, 4:30 AM

I received this response from J&G Sales in AZ when I inquired about a Saiga 7.62X39 Sporter Rifle, TGI Import.

Writing a letter/calling/etc will not help with J&G, even if you're with an 07. Good group of guys, as long as you're not from CA. They told a friend of mine that the AK action was banned in CA. Meh, they're a big seller, but there are hundreds of others just as big and some in CA that you could give your money to instead.

DocClark340

05-27-2011, 7:14 AM

Writing a letter/calling/etc will not help with J&G, even if you're with an 07. Good group of guys, as long as you're not from CA. They told a friend of mine that the AK action was banned in CA. Meh, they're a big seller, but there are hundreds of others just as big and some in CA that you could give your money to instead.
I have gotten crap form J&G before (I have a C&R). I know there are other companys out there that will take my money.

:38::iamwithstupid::smash:
:beatdeadhorse5:

iskra31

05-27-2011, 8:05 AM

wasn't that in all the US and not just CA?

Yeah I think it was part of the Federal ban list. Roberti-Roos AW List?

skylovia

05-27-2011, 9:22 AM

Henderson Defense, Peach State Guns, Atlantic Firearms. All have a good relationship with Californians. I have personally used Henderson Defense and got excellent customer service.

EBR Works

05-27-2011, 4:03 PM

My email conversation with J&G (newest at top). The ball is in their court.

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Michael wrote:

Would your legal advisor consider talking to one of the attorneys from the CalGuns Foundation? Thanks.

Sir,
Thank you, however J&G Sales does have legal advisers to attempt to follow the laws of every state we deal with.

We are also aware of the California court ruling finding the current California firearm laws unconstitutional, however the legislature has not yet changed them so we must abide by them until they do.
J&G Sales

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Michael wrote:

Sadly, the Cali DOJ has refused to update their website in the past 5+ years, so a great deal of the information there is not current. It’s unfortunate that the DOJ continues to fail in their obligation to keep the public educated about current law. They do this intentionally to create confusion and misinformation. I fully understand your concerns over this issue. If you want I can refer you to one of the attorneys with the CalGuns Foundation that can explain this to you fully. I think that you would agree that it is in the best interests of the firearms community as a whole to help educate dealers so that they can do business here. I’m happy to help if you want.

Sir,
We do understand the difference. Here is a quote from the law:
This section is declaratory of existing law, as
amended, and a clarification of the law and the
Legislature’s intent, which bans the weapons
enumerated in this section, the weapons included
in the list promulgated by the Attorney
General pursuant to Section 12276.5, and any
other models which are only variations of those
weapons with minor differences, regardless of
the manufacturer.

Please note the bold text. This is on page 14 of the California assault weapons guide. Thank you.
J&G Sales

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Michael wrote:

No problem. I thought you might want to nip this in the bud since CalGuns has a tremendous influence on California buyers.

So, you guys understand the difference between the RAA Saigas which are legal in California and the Kalashnikov USA Saigas that are not, right? You are missing out on sales if you refuse to sell the RAA guns to the poor unfortunates here in California that have to deal with our liberal reps in state government.

I would really like to see CalGunners all use logical and persuasive communication along with CGF resources to get misinformed dealers like this educated for our benefit rather than complaining endlessly about how they refuse to ship to us. I'm going to make this a personal priority as time allows.

Blitzburgh

05-28-2011, 8:38 AM

(I have a C&R).

You still owe me dinner for talking you into that. Clown.

Lord Boling

05-28-2011, 9:22 AM

Perhaps those of you bashing them should read what others have said about J&G. (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=354216)
It looks like they quite often try their hardest to sell to California while still staying within the restrictive laws.

Thank you EBR Works for talking with them.

I would like to know what info you have to make J&G change their minds? The law they quoted is convincing.

ke6guj

05-28-2011, 11:56 AM

I would like to know what info you have to make J&G change their minds? The law they quoted is convincing.

No it isn't.

CADOJ listed the following rifle "Kalashnikov USA Hunter Rifle/Saiga" . the maker/importer is "kalashnikov USA" and the model is "Hunter Rifle/Saiga". The Saiga that J&G is selling is from a different maker/importer, so it is not a listed make model.

that would be like them banning a Chevrolet Corvette but not banning a Pontiac Corvette.

and yes, they mentioned 12276(f)
This section is declaratory of existing law, as amended, and a clarification of the law and the Legislature's intent which bans the weapons enumerated in this section, the weapons included in the list promulgated by the Attorney General pursuant to Section 12276.5, and any other models which are only variations of those weapons with minor differences, regardless of the manufacturer. The Legislature has defined assault weapons as the types, series, and models listed in this section because it was the most effective way to identify and restrict a specific class of semiautomatic weapons. but as mentioned before , the Harrott decision basically moots that section.

Lord Boling

05-28-2011, 12:05 PM

The law states that the firearms listed are examples and that similar firearms, regardless of manufacturer, are banned as well.

I know it is as ridiculous as your example however that is the case with the whole firearms law.

ke6guj

05-28-2011, 12:22 PM

The law states that the firearms listed are examples and that similar firearms, regardless of manufacturer, are banned as well.

right, but case law moots that section of the PC. Unfortunately the courts do not have the power to actually delete sections of the PC, so even though that those sections are still listed, they are not in effect.

Just like if you read the sections of the law added by AB962, you'll see that mail-order handgun ammo purchases are banned, even though that that law was tossed out. It doesn't apply to us even though you can still read it in the law.

chead

05-28-2011, 12:29 PM

Lots of gun owners in California don't understand California gun law, and with good reason. It's complex and seemingly intended to be almost impossible to follow correctly and legally. I highly doubt any retailer or distributor that doesn't want to ship to California makes that choice out of malice. Do you really think they, a business, would refuse to take a potential customer's money unless they had real (however unfounded) fears about the legality of shipping to California?

Lord Boling

05-28-2011, 12:34 PM

The Harrott decision determined that the law was "unconstitutionally vague".
However the law is still in effect and is not moot.

chead

05-28-2011, 12:40 PM

The Harrott decision determined that the law was "unconstitutionally vague".
However the law is still in effect and is not moot.

A ruling of "unconstitutionally vague" voids the law.

Lord Boling

05-28-2011, 12:53 PM

A ruling of "unconstitutionally vague" voids the law.

Maybe, but would you like to be a large dealer putting your business on the line hoping that is the case? There is no proof that the law is voided.

And the difference in this case and the case against AB962 is that Judge Jeffrey Hamilton issued an injunction forbidding the state from enforcing the law. I have not heard of an injunction in the case of PC 12276.

chead

05-28-2011, 12:54 PM

Maybe, but would you like to be a large dealer putting your business on the line hoping that is the case? There is no proof that the law is voided.

The law is ruled unconstitutional, it's void. There's no ambiguity about that particular ruling.

ke6guj

05-28-2011, 12:56 PM

as mentioned before, CGF is going to talk to J&G with documentation to show them that the Saigas that they are selling are legal in CA. Once J&G's legal advisors read the Harrott Supreme Court decision, they will know if that section of the law has been vioded or modified.

bwiese

05-29-2011, 9:35 AM

right, but case law moots that section of the PC. Unfortunately the courts do not have the power to actually delete sections of the PC, so even though that those sections are still listed, they are not in effect.

Just like if you read the sections of the law added by AB962, you'll see that mail-order handgun ammo purchases are banned, even though that that law was tossed out. It doesn't apply to us even though you can still read it in the law.

Yep. Invalidated law stays on CA books.

Courts don't get the ability to rewrite [or delete] the bad law on the books, it's just nullified. It would take specific legislative action to pluck the 'copies and duplicates' law from the statutes.

[ This is why NRA/CRPA - thru their Local Action Project - goes around looking for invalid city & county laws still on the books that are either nullified by court ruling or are preempted by state law, and then forces them (thru threat of suit) to pull them [this works at local level]. One perfect example is - or I should say, was :-) - the separate Richmond, CA hicap mag ban. It is also why we went thru OAL to remove a residual proposed rulemaking notice (about proposed reregulation of 'detachable magazine' definition) from DOJ website because even though that activity was dead it had a FUD effect on lawful conduct. ]

The confusion J&G staff is having is thus multi-fold:

they're murky about Saiga being a 'series' member - vs. what permitted 'series' membership really is.
.
they're somehow confused that, in spite of Harrott decision, PC 12276(e)/(f) is still "on the books"
and perhaps thinking that the former somehow should have plucked the latter.

[I do not think this situation is that much different in other states, so I'm wondering if J&G's mistaken
concept of this resulted from the work product of their attorney or not.]

bwiese

05-29-2011, 9:47 AM

Maybe, but would you like to be a large dealer putting your business on the line hoping that is the case? There is no proof that the law is voided.

Yes there is.
Harrott v. County of Kings, 25 P.3d 649, Cal. 2001

A CA Supreme Court decision reshapes or even nullifies CA law on the books: all operative law is a mix of statute, regulation and case law.

And the difference in this case and the case against AB962 is that Judge Jeffrey Hamilton issued an injunction forbidding the state from enforcing the law. I have not heard of an injunction in the case of PC 12276.

The injunction on 962 was specifically requested to stop immediate damage and "market killing".

There was no injunction resulting from (or requested by) Harrott: that case was about an individual getting his rifle back (as payment for legal services) and worked all the way up the chain.

But Harrott indeed did define the make/model standard and invalidated of vague 'series' definition.

We were just too lazy and scared in 2001 to take the ball and run with it further and had to wait til mid 2005 to start 'exercising' it.

350,000 new off-list black rifles sold by CA FFLs in CA proves Harrott holds and is in force. Internal DOJ communications garnered by NRA public record requests revealed the DOJ regards it as such too.

Cyc Wid It

05-29-2011, 1:51 PM

This seems to be a pretty positive response from JG, compared to various members' experiences in the past. Maybe you got lucky with who answered your e-mail? Anyway, Bweise probably has the best shot at convincing them out of anyone, so let's hope for the best.

tonelar

05-29-2011, 2:15 PM

You really don't recognize FUD when you hear it?
Clue #1: If you hear it from someone out of state, it's FUD.

DocClark340

05-29-2011, 3:21 PM

You still owe me dinner for talking you into that. Clown.

How about a big hug and kiss instead.....

I Love you Man!!!!!!!!!

:drool5::drool5:

:King:

EBR Works

05-29-2011, 5:31 PM

This seems to be a pretty positive response from JG, compared to various members' experiences in the past. Maybe you got lucky with who answered your e-mail? Anyway, Bweise probably has the best shot at convincing them out of anyone, so let's hope for the best.

I think most would agree that non-adversarial, logical and empathetic communication works wonders with vendors that are simply cautious of stepping into a minefield, real or perceived. I personally enjoy the challenge of converting them into being friends of California. I'm anxious to hear Bill's after action report.

You really don't recognize FUD when you hear it?
Clue #1: If you hear it from someone out of state, it's FUD.

So, let's stomp on it with education until it dies.

SoCal Bob

05-29-2011, 8:54 PM

I have done business with J&G and appreciated their friendliness in dealing with a California C&R buyer. I believe they are taking a cautious approach but are reasonable people. I can't see them turning their back on legal business but as we well know California has gun laws that don't make sense and an AG's office that traditionally likes to confuse rather than clear up issues.

Give them the benefit of the doubt and help them to understand the nuances of our laws.

Shepherds_Hook_47

05-29-2011, 9:40 PM

Thanks Bill. Please let us know how it goes.

I would really like to see CalGunners all use logical and persuasive communication along with CGF resources to get misinformed dealers like this educated for our benefit rather than complaining endlessly about how they refuse to ship to us. I'm going to make this a personal priority as time allows.

I think J & G sales would be a great resource for you guys out in the peoples republic of CA. Being in AR I don't have that problem. But I understand that
freedom and liberty are very precious to those who have it not, unfortunately more often so than those that have it (or more of it).

hope things get straightened out.

I have done business with J&G and appreciated their friendliness in dealing with a California C&R buyer. I believe they are taking a cautious approach but are reasonable people. I can't see them turning their back on legal business but as we well know California has gun laws that don't make sense and an AG's office that traditionally likes to confuse rather than clear up issues.

Give them the benefit of the doubt and help them to understand the nuances of our laws.

second that one to.....

vincewarde

05-30-2011, 9:01 PM

J&G did respond to my email a few months ago stating that if AB932 went into effect they would honor the C&R exemption and ship to CA. That is much better than many of the online dealers who planned on just nixing all CA sales. It seems to me that they are good at following the letter of the law - they just are not up speed on our court decisions.

In addition, let's remember that they are one of the dealers that sold AK's (under ATF orders) to gun runners in the Gunwalker scandal. Although I am sure they did nothing wrong, I am also sure that they are doing business with the knowledge that they are under a microscope. Nailing them for any violation would muddy the waters, and provide cover for the people behind the scandal.

Capita159

05-31-2011, 12:19 AM

that would be like them banning a Chevrolet Corvette but not banning a Pontiac Corvette.

Actually Pontiac did have a Corvette. It was called the Pontiac Banshee.
Sorry, that was so off topic.

Anyways, I heard from my local gun supplier that ATF wants and to banned the Saiga shotgun.

rromeo

05-31-2011, 3:11 AM

Saiga shotguns are not banned. The prices are even coming back down as they are being imported again.

Briancnelson

05-31-2011, 6:24 AM

Incidentally, there are plenty of cases that state a court ruling of unconstitutionality is equivalent to an injunction against enforcing that law. Thus no reason to issue one. This came up recently in the Obamacare litigation, when the administration was castigated for claiming they could continue to enforce it since he hadn't specifically enjoined them.

bwiese

05-31-2011, 11:13 AM

Folks

I have had a very nice chat with Samuel from J&G. I think they'll take a bit of time to digest the material, and I have told them I'm always available to chat (and can refer them to counsel that will say the same things I say).

Let's not harrass them, they do value CA sales and are nice guys.

EBR Works

05-31-2011, 11:22 AM

Good job Bill!

SoCal Bob

05-31-2011, 11:28 AM

Thank you Bill. They have made me feel welcome when I am there and appear truly pleased to have a C&R customer from California stop by. I will be visiting them in a couple weeks and I think I hear a P1 calling my name. ;)

As you might know, The Calguns Foundation (CGF) in cooperation with SAF is running two 42 USC 1983 civil rights cases involving CA's AW laws and a variety of DOJ issues in their implementation. I would not be surprised at all if other "big" AW cases come up from other organizations ;) in addition to other future litigation CGF may have.

morrcarr67

05-31-2011, 1:21 PM

I would not be surprised at all if other "big" AW cases come up from other organizations ;) in addition to other future litigation CGF may have.

Music to my ears. :cool:

tonelar

05-31-2011, 1:42 PM

...
Anyways, I heard from my local gun supplier that ATF wants and to banned the Saiga shotgun.

Saiga shotguns are not banned. The prices are even coming back down as they are being imported again.

I'm buying a Saiga12 as soon as theyre back down to $379-$425 again.

Folks

I have had a very nice chat with Samuel from J&G. I think they'll take a bit of time to digest the material, and I have told them I'm always available to chat (and can refer them to counsel that will say the same things I say).

Let's not harrass them, they do value CA sales and are nice guys.

^-THIS! J&G have alwaze been good people to buy certain items from. It'll be great to one day be able to shop their entire inventory. Thanks Bill and EBR.

Can someone see if the OP might be interested in adding a question mark or FUD ALERT to their thread title?

DocClark340

06-01-2011, 4:35 PM

Folks

I have had a very nice chat with Samuel from J&G. I think they'll take a bit of time to digest the material, and I have told them I'm always available to chat (and can refer them to counsel that will say the same things I say).

Let's not harrass them, they do value CA sales and are nice guys.

Thanks you sir,

Its great to hear a strong voice of reason has not fallen on deaf ears after all.....